Mirzhan_Irkegulov comments on Voiceofra is banned - Less Wrong

21 Post author: NancyLebovitz 23 December 2015 06:29PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (222)

Comments (222)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Vaniver 24 December 2015 05:00:37PM 16 points [-]

I don't think it's "abuse of power" to obstruct the dissemination of such abhorrent views, especially at a website that has world-improvement as one of its central goals.

The truth of a view is more important than whether or not it's abhorrent. I agree with entirelyuseless in that I endorse banning advancedatheist because he had a long string of low-quality posting but do not endorse banning him because of the content of that comment by itself.

Comment author: polymathwannabe 24 December 2015 05:14:57PM 2 points [-]

The truth of a view is more important than whether or not it's abhorrent.

Amen. But the LW Terms of Use state:

You are explicitly prohibited from: [...] Posting or transmitting content through the Website that is harassing, threatens or encourages bodily harm, constitutes hate speech, or advocates for the destruction of property;

This case went beyond LW's usual attitude toward debate; this was explicit advocacy of violence, which should always be treated as Serious Business.

Comment author: Mirzhan_Irkegulov 24 December 2015 08:28:52PM 5 points [-]

As much as I am a feminist and find Advancedatheist's views insane and super-creepy, “we need to restore a healthy patriarchy where women can't get sexual experience until marriage” is not an advocacy of violence. Maybe he wants to restore patriarchy via peaceful means.

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 25 December 2015 04:13:34PM *  5 points [-]

It's hard (at least for me -- YMMV) to read "can't get" (emphasis added; as opposed to e.g. "don't get") in a way that doesn't imply the threat of violence (broadly construed) against women who do try to get sexual experience before marriage. Then again, by such standards proposals to e.g. ban a particular drug would also count as advocacy of violence, so probably EY had something less broad in mind.

Comment author: username2 25 December 2015 07:00:21PM 7 points [-]

Then again, by such standards proposals to e.g. ban a particular drug would also count as advocacy of violence,

Or discussion of any laws whatsoever.

Comment author: polymathwannabe 24 December 2015 09:26:00PM 0 points [-]

I meant the part where he implied that lack of sex justified mass murder.

Comment author: Mirzhan_Irkegulov 24 December 2015 10:12:19PM 6 points [-]

I've read his Reddit comment. It doesn't seem like he's justifying (as in saying it's OK) mass murder, just claiming mass murder will continue if patriarchy is not restored. I get how you feel about AA, but you're stretching.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit